Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35911263›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Evaluation of Different Criteria in the Diagnosis of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy by Electrocardiogram in Comparison With Echocardiogram.

João Pedro Marcato, Felipe Senra Santos, André Gama Palone, Gustavo Lenci Marques

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

João Pedro MarcatoInternal Medicine, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, BRA.
Felipe Senra SantosInternal Medicine, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, BRA.
André Gama PaloneCardiology, Heart Institute, Clinical Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, BRA.
Gustavo Lenci MarquesInternal Medicine, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, BRA.
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Federal do Paraná · BRUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is an adaptive mechanism of the cardiac muscle due to increased activity demand or functional overload. The echocardiogram (ECHO) presents a better performance in relation to the electrocardiogram (ECG) for the diagnosis of LVH. However, the ECG is a low-cost and easy-to-reproduce diagnostic alternative and can be useful in services and locations where the ECHO is not yet easily accessible. Recently, a new criterion for LVH was proposed by Peguero-Lo Presti. The aim of this article was to evaluate the electrocardiographic criteria for the diagnosis of LVH (Sokolow-Lyon, Cornell voltage, Romhilt-Estes, and Peguero-Lo Presti) in comparison to the diagnosis made by the ECHO. ECHO and ECG from 142 patients' medical records were analyzed. Patients were divided into three groups according to the ECHO - control, eccentric LVH, and concentric LVH. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of the four electrocardiographic criteria were evaluated in three scenarios - (1) LVH vs control, (2) concentric LVH vs control, and (3) eccentric LVH vs control. Of the 142 patients included in the study, 100 (70.4%) had LVH. According to the type of hypertrophy, the 100 patients with LVH were divided into two groups - 41 (28.8%) had eccentric LVH and 59 (41.5%) had concentric LVH. Of all the scenarios, the Peguero-Lo Presti criteria obtained the best sensitivity (1, 41%; 2, 33,9%; 3, 51,2%) and accuracy (1, 56,3%; 2, 58,4%; 3, 69,8%). The Sokolow-Lyon criteria showed greater specificity in all analyses (100%). None of the electrocardiographic criteria obtained sensitivity values ​​that would justify the use of the electrocardiogram as a screening test for LVH. No differences were found for eccentric and concentric LVH in terms of diagnosis using electrocardiographic criteria. We recommend the use of these criteria to confirm the diagnosis of LVH, especially in low-complexity services that do not have image-based diagnostic tests.

Indexed as

cardiovasculardiagnostic techniquesechocardiogram (echo)electrocardiography (ecg)left ventricular hypertrophy (lvh)

Identifiers

PMID35911263
PMCPMC9329598
OpenAlexW4283652785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.